- Input is created within the sample itself depending on the input memory type. In case of DX9 the input is a square box moving across a background. In case of DX11 the input is alternating different colored backgrounds

- The sample prints Latency, Average encode time and Average time in ms to write one encoded frame to the file

- Here the avg. encoding time is the PURE encoding time, means time to encode one frame by VCE

- Sample uses Pipeline based APIs. "Pipeline" is an framework using AMF Native APIs within

- Natively (without internal conversion), the encoder supports only NV12 as input, but if the user passes any other format BGRA, AGRA, RGBA, YV12, YUV420P, it will be converted by the internal converter before submitting to the encoder block. Input file formats: NV12, YUV420P, BGRA, ARGB, RGBA, YV12 frames

- In case of the pipeline Encoder, because of the nature of the pipeline framework, the performance measure is the sum of “Time to read one frame” + “Color Conversion” + “Encoding Time” + “File Write Time”. Hence the reason why you are getting low performance numbers on executing Pipeline Encoder sample.

For TRUE encoding performance of the HW on AMF, we would suggest you execute Simple Encoder sample.

We noticed that there's a 1.1 release recently so we have some tries on latest version.

The sample changes a lot but it seems that the piplelineEncoder one is the most close one which accept yuv source and output h264 file.

The encoding fps increased to 20fps (which is 4fps on 1.1 beta) but still not acceptable. We did some testing on MFT trancoding example provided in 1.0 release and get 45fps trancoding speed on same machine, so, my point is, there must be something wrong with the amf version.

Here's our output for capabilityManager.exe and running screenshot for pipelineEncoder.

- Input is created within the sample itself depending on the input memory type. In case of DX9 the input is a square box moving across a background. In case of DX11 the input is alternating different colored backgrounds

- The sample prints Latency, Average encode time and Average time in ms to write one encoded frame to the file

- Here the avg. encoding time is the PURE encoding time, means time to encode one frame by VCE

- Sample uses Pipeline based APIs. "Pipeline" is an framework using AMF Native APIs within

- Natively (without internal conversion), the encoder supports only NV12 as input, but if the user passes any other format BGRA, AGRA, RGBA, YV12, YUV420P, it will be converted by the internal converter before submitting to the encoder block. Input file formats: NV12, YUV420P, BGRA, ARGB, RGBA, YV12 frames

- In case of the pipeline Encoder, because of the nature of the pipeline framework, the performance measure is the sum of “Time to read one frame” + “Color Conversion” + “Encoding Time” + “File Write Time”. Hence the reason why you are getting low performance numbers on executing Pipeline Encoder sample.

For TRUE encoding performance of the HW on AMF, we would suggest you execute Simple Encoder sample.